Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Court of Appeal of New Zealand |
Last Updated: 2 September 2015
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND
|
|
BETWEEN
|
Applicant |
AND
|
Respondent |
JUDGMENT OF FRENCH J
The application for bail pending appeal is
declined.
____________________________________________________________________
REASONS
[1] Ms Zheng has applied for bail pending the determination of an appeal against conviction and sentence. She was convicted in the High Court of drug dealing offences involving pseudoephedrine[1] and sentenced on 24 July 2015 by Gilbert J to a term of imprisonment of two years and nine months.[2]
[2] The primary grounds of the bail application are that permanent arrangements have yet to be made for the care of her dependent children; the prospects of success on appeal are “very strong”; Ms Zheng, who does not speak English, may experience difficulties having her medical and dietary needs met in prison; and if her appeal is not granted a hearing date swiftly, she will be eligible for parole in 11 months, meaning the appeal could be rendered nugatory.
[3] At the time the bail application was filed, the appeal did not have a hearing date and it was assumed to be some considerable time away. However, the Court has been able to provide an early hearing date of 2 September 2015. In my view, in those circumstances, the concerns raised by her counsel lose much of their force. Further, while I am obviously not in a position to attempt any extensive analysis of the merits of the appeal, on the limited information before me I would not necessarily endorse Mr Gotlieb’s assessment of them as falling in the “very strong” category so as to justify bail.
[4] Having regard to s 14 of the Bail Act 2000, Ms Zheng has failed to satisfy me that hers is a case where on the balance of probabilities, it is in the interests of justice to grant her bail pending appeal.
[5] The application for bail is accordingly declined.
Solicitors:
Crown Law
Office, Wellington for Respondent
[1] Ms Zheng was found guilty following jury trial of five charges of supplying pseudoephedrine and one charge of possession of pseudoephedrine for the purpose of supply.
[2] Lam v R [2015] NZHC 1713.
NZLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZCA/2015/369.html